Boxing's Boogeymen - Hunter or Haunted?

[Enlightened-One]

I previously created a thread where one of my favourite boxing scribes, Vivek Wallace, posted the following commentary on Facebook about the outcome of the Lomachenko-Rigondeaux bout, which seemed fairly controversial in nature:

“Lomachenko-Rigondeaux Rant!!!”

Well fresh off the back of that highly provocative post, which attracted quite a few passionate responses from our fellow forum members, I thought I’d create a new thread about his commentary of the Canelo-GGG bout, which is similarly controversial in nature:

“Boxing's Boogeymen - Hunter or Haunted?”

I was sitting down pondering the past few years in the fight game when I noticed a trend. Pacquiao, Chocolatito, Golovkin, Kovalev.....All men who HBO stuffed down our throats as "arguably the best of their era". Every broadcast served heavy doses of bravado, touting their power, their fan-friendly style, and their ability to put cheeks-in-seats!

What's intriguing here is that with the exception of Pacquaio, each of the others lost to men who had less hype (in the eyes of the fans), yet were far more skilled! It truly makes me wonder how is it that so many fans fail to realize SKILLS PAY THE BILLS!

You can have all the power in the world, and you can have more media buzz than Playboy's new pin-up girl! At the end of the day, it's a different game when you're across from an opponent with a chin to outlast you, the hustle to outwork you, and the skills to out-think you!

Golovkin is a VERY SOLID fighter. But I loved every minute of seeing the man everyone said couldn't walk him down do just that! Same for Kovalev. Everyone said Ward couldn't hang. After a grueling first fight, he reminded us again that this isn't checkers, it's chess!

These boogeymen keep getting mowed down by men you all think "don't have it". Stop asking why? The proof is between the ears, not just between the ropes.

#ThinkingMansGame #ChessNotCheckers #SkillsPayTheBills #SoundOff #TalkToMe #FightFam #LeftHookLounge #BoxingHeadsUnited

For the record, I don’t necessarily agree with all of Vivek’s thoughts, but he does raise one or two rather intriguing points… and I also appreciate his eloquently poetic style of writing.

Thoughts?

[jamamb]

yet he bashed the plenty skilled loma too, while finding a way to praise broner and paul williams in the same article ...i wonder if there is something more overarching that drives his views.

also not sure id agree at all that sri was far more skilled then roman...more like sri was the bigger harder hitting guy. so really imo only 2 of the 4 guys he mentions lost in the last year or 2 to a more skilled opponent, and of course ggg drew with canelo the first time and kov vs ward 1 was very close

its true though that power can get more hype then skills and looks more spectacular comparitatvely then skills when vs overmatched opponents

i do think wallace has a demographic bias though, its as clear as day to me reading his stuff. and tbh im not that fussed if some guys who were hyped lost. of course networks etc are gonna hype and pretty much everyone will lose at some point

[punchoutsb]

The author seems to be suggesting that Pac, Roman, Krusher and GGG are not arguably the best of their eras which is false. He is also suggesting that losing close/controversial SD, MD, and draws equals getting mowed down.

In short, he’s an idiot and the article sucks.

[jamamb]

and pac lost to the quintessential brawler who won in large part to size and strength. and roman lost to a stronger slugger himself who overpowered him

[punchoutsb]

and pac lost to the quintessential brawler who won in large part to size and strength. and roman lost to a stronger slugger himself

And wasn’t Ward the betting favorite against Kovalev? I may be wrong on that but I certainly don’t remember “everyone” saying Ward couldn’t hang.

The author is just smelling his own farts.

[jamamb]

yes, ward was the betting favourite both times. kovs stamina was his biggest problem tbh, his skills were fine

and canelo is like the biggest a side in boxing with aj and has been hbos biggest star, ggg was hardly hyped way beyond him

[Enlightened-One]

yes, ward was the betting favourite both times.

I’ve just double-checked, and I can confirm that Andre Ward was indeed the betting favourite for both of his bouts against Sergey Kovalev, but he was favoured by the smallest of margins in what were pretty much perceived as 50-50 fights.

I might be wrong about this, but I seem to recall the majority of the boxing aficionados that frequent this forum favouring a victory for the Krusher in the rematch though.

I suspect the reason why mainstream casuals favoured Ward over Kovalev, was because he was an English speaker that frequently appeared on US TV.

That being said, I strongly suspect the betting odds within Eastern Europe probably favoured a victory for Sergey Kovalev on both occassions, since he was their “man”. I don’t know this for sure though, it’s just a guess on my part.

People forget that the world doesn’t consist purely of the UK and the USA.

It’s like those that quote the English language media scorecards for the GGG-Canelo rematch, whilst excluding those from the Spanish language territories (i.e. more than 40m in the US, Mexico and at least 20 other countries).

[IKSRTFO]

I previously created a thread where one of my favourite boxing scribes, Vivek Wallace, posted the following commentary on Facebook about the outcome of the Lomachenko-Rigondeaux bout, which seemed fairly controversial in nature:

“Lomachenko-Rigondeaux Rant!!!”

Well fresh off the back of that highly provocative post, which attracted quite a few passionate responses from our fellow forum members, I thought I’d create a new thread about his commentary of the Canelo-GGG bout, which is similarly controversial in nature:

“Boxing's Boogeymen - Hunter or Haunted?”

I was sitting down pondering the past few years in the fight game when I noticed a trend. Pacquiao, Chocolatito, Golovkin, Kovalev.....All men who HBO stuffed down our throats as "arguably the best of their era". Every broadcast served heavy doses of bravado, touting their power, their fan-friendly style, and their ability to put cheeks-in-seats!

What's intriguing here is that with the exception of Pacquaio, each of the others lost to men who had less hype (in the eyes of the fans), yet were far more skilled! It truly makes me wonder how is it that so many fans fail to realize SKILLS PAY THE BILLS!

You can have all the power in the world, and you can have more media buzz than Playboy's new pin-up girl! At the end of the day, it's a different game when you're across from an opponent with a chin to outlast you, the hustle to outwork you, and the skills to out-think you!

Golovkin is a VERY SOLID fighter. But I loved every minute of seeing the man everyone said couldn't walk him down do just that! Same for Kovalev. Everyone said Ward couldn't hang. After a grueling first fight, he reminded us again that this isn't checkers, it's chess!

These boogeymen keep getting mowed down by men you all think "don't have it". Stop asking why? The proof is between the ears, not just between the ropes.

#ThinkingMansGame #ChessNotCheckers #SkillsPayTheBills #SoundOff #TalkToMe #FightFam #LeftHookLounge #BoxingHeadsUnited

For the record, I don’t necessarily agree with all of Vivek’s thoughts, but he does raise one or two rather intriguing points… and I also appreciate his eloquently poetic style of writing.

Thoughts?

Totally biased and stereotypical of fighters with power being boogeymen or that they lack skill. Or that power alone makes you a boogeyman. What about Errol Spence being a boogeyman? It's forgotten that Marvin Hagler was a boogeyman of his day before the Duran fight. Would Tyson be described as a boogeyman for his power even though many did want to fight him? Was Paul Williams a boogeyman? Kostya Tyszu? No one was in a rush to fight Rigo, was he a boogeyman?

[punchoutsb]

Right so we’ve established it’s an inaccurate shite article. Probably time to close the shite thread